I don't get that this is such "great" news. Maybe for the handful of people who actually want to go to watch these two sports.

I thought the Chancellor & new AD were telling us that we had hard choices ahead to get an ongoing balanced budget for collegiate sports.

$30M for two sports have have no chance to even come close to partially paying for themselves sounds crazy to me. Where in the world is this money going to come from?

The hard choice, is that from what I was told back in.... 2015(?) we weren't getting a basketball facility without addressing some of the other female only deficient (to say the least) facilities on campus. Specifically softball.

I don't get that this is such "great" news. Maybe for the handful of people who actually want to go to watch these two sports.

I thought the Chancellor & new AD were telling us that we had hard choices ahead to get an ongoing balanced budget for collegiate sports.

$30M for two sports have have no chance to even come close to partially paying for themselves sounds crazy to me. Where in the world is this money going to come from?

The hard choice, is that from what I was told back in.... 2015(?) we weren't getting a basketball facility without addressing some of the other female only deficient (to say the least) facilities on campus. Specifically softball.

$30M for women's beach volleyball? Softball? This money is going to go straight down the tubes. Total loss.

I don't get that this is such "great" news. Maybe for the handful of people who actually want to go to watch these two sports.

I thought the Chancellor & new AD were telling us that we had hard choices ahead to get an ongoing balanced budget for collegiate sports.

$30M for two sports have have no chance to even come close to partially paying for themselves sounds crazy to me. Where in the world is this money going to come from?

The hard choice, is that from what I was told back in.... 2015(?) we weren't getting a basketball facility without addressing some of the other female only deficient (to say the least) facilities on campus. Specifically softball.

$30M for women's beach volleyball? Softball? This money is going to go straight down the tubes. Total loss.

You thought having those teams was some sort of money maker before this?

I don't get that this is such "great" news. Maybe for the handful of people who actually want to go to watch these two sports.

I thought the Chancellor & new AD were telling us that we had hard choices ahead to get an ongoing balanced budget for collegiate sports.

$30M for two sports have have no chance to even come close to partially paying for themselves sounds crazy to me. Where in the world is this money going to come from?

The hard choice, is that from what I was told back in.... 2015(?) we weren't getting a basketball facility without addressing some of the other female only deficient (to say the least) facilities on campus. Specifically softball.

$30M for women's beach volleyball? Softball? This money is going to go straight down the tubes. Total loss.

You thought having those teams was some sort of money maker before this?

Of course not. We're spending $30M more, additionally that we don't have on them. Will we get addional numbers of women playing these sports for the $30M to balance Title IX numbers? No. The team sizes will stay the same. The point is that this is not "good news" in any context other than for the future beach volley ball & softball players themselves, who will continue to toil largely in anonymity.

I don't get that this is such "great" news. Maybe for the handful of people who actually want to go to watch these two sports.

I thought the Chancellor & new AD were telling us that we had hard choices ahead to get an ongoing balanced budget for collegiate sports.

$30M for two sports have have no chance to even come close to partially paying for themselves sounds crazy to me. Where in the world is this money going to come from?

The hard choice, is that from what I was told back in.... 2015(?) we weren't getting a basketball facility without addressing some of the other female only deficient (to say the least) facilities on campus. Specifically softball.

$30M for women's beach volleyball? Softball? This money is going to go straight down the tubes. Total loss.

You thought having those teams was some sort of money maker before this?

Of course not. We're spending $30M more, additionally that we don't have on them. Will we get addional numbers of women playing these sports for the $30M to balance Title IX numbers? No. The team sizes will stay the same. The point is that this is not "good news" in any context other than for the future beach volley ball & softball players themselves, who will continue to toil largely in anonymity.

It means we're complying with title 9 by providing equitable facilities for women's sports as well. This is the cost of having sports. And bigger picture, the cost of adding revenue sports facilities.

The hard choice, is that from what I was told back in.... 2015(?) we weren't getting a basketball facility without addressing some of the other female only deficient (to say the least) facilities on campus. Specifically softball.

I wonder if there will be TV facilities built into these venues for the Pac 12 network. 30 million seems awfully expensive for a remodel of the softball venue and the new Volleyball courts. Of course, San Volleyball and Softball seem to be staples of the Pac 12 network....

The hard choice, is that from what I was told back in.... 2015(?) we weren't getting a basketball facility without addressing some of the other female only deficient (to say the least) facilities on campus. Specifically softball.

can you expand on that? why would that be?

TITLE IX.Cal fell behind on meeting the requirements for women's sports facilities and support (think of the lacrosse team playing their matches @ Stanfurd) and the threat of a lawsuit was real. The lack of attention to the whole Cal sports world was creating significant risk for the AD and Chancellor.

Fortunately, the Chancellor we have now sees the larger picture and has a partner in the newly hired AD who are both willing to take action rather than talk or do nothing.

The hard choice, is that from what I was told back in.... 2015(?) we weren't getting a basketball facility without addressing some of the other female only deficient (to say the least) facilities on campus. Specifically softball.

can you expand on that? why would that be?

TITLE IX.Cal fell behind on meeting the requirements for women's sports facilities and support (think of the lacrosse team playing their matches @ Stanfurd) and the threat of a lawsuit was real. The lack of attention to the whole Cal sports world was creating significant risk for the AD and Chancellor.

Fortunately, the Chancellor we have now sees the larger picture and has a partner in the newly hired AD who are both willing to take action rather than talk or do nothing.

Thanks PB. I recall FH suing due to their situation, so I guess it would make sense that the risk of additional lawsuits was there if the men's facilities were upgraded with no attention to any women's facilities.

I don't get that this is such "great" news. Maybe for the handful of people who actually want to go to watch these two sports.

I thought the Chancellor & new AD were telling us that we had hard choices ahead to get an ongoing balanced budget for collegiate sports.

$30M for two sports have have no chance to even come close to partially paying for themselves sounds crazy to me. Where in the world is this money going to come from?

Did you read the letter? She stated specifically where the money is coming from.

Yes, I read the press release. Here is what it said:

the campus will draw from what are known as "undesignated bequests" to cover the majority of the costs, with the athletic department embarking on a capital campaign to raise additional funds.

The money is coming from general donations, not from people who donated to specifically support the either of the two sports. This is because there is so little interest or support for either sport no one is donating money specifically for them.

I suppose throwing away $30M on beach volleyball & softball is a "hard" choice; It makes balancing the Athletics budget $30M more dufficult than it already is.

I don't get that this is such "great" news. Maybe for the handful of people who actually want to go to watch these two sports.

I thought the Chancellor & new AD were telling us that we had hard choices ahead to get an ongoing balanced budget for collegiate sports.

$30M for two sports have have no chance to even come close to partially paying for themselves sounds crazy to me. Where in the world is this money going to come from?

Did you read the letter? She stated specifically where the money is coming from.

Yes, I read the press release. Here is what it said:

the campus will draw from what are known as "undesignated bequests" to cover the majority of the costs, with the athletic department embarking on a capital campaign to raise additional funds.

The money is coming from general donations, not from people who donated to specifically support the either of the two sports. This is because there is so little interest or support for either sport no one is donating money specifically for them.

I suppose throwing away $30M on beach volleyball & softball is a "hard" choice; It makes balancing the Athletics budget $30M more dufficult than it already is.

I'm not disagreeing with your final conclusion (that it will make it $30M harder to balance the budget, though I imagine they will be able to spread this out over some time? Perhaps not.). If you had said that, I'd not have quibbled. I was merely pointing out that your question ("Where in the world is this money going to come from?") has been answered.

I will also point out you make an unfair conclusion, which I have italicized above. You don't know that the people who made these "undesignated bequests" don't support one or both of these sports, or other sports. It may be that they give money "undesignated" to allow the school to make these sorts of decisions. In fact, it is probably more likely than not that the people donating "undesignated" money in fact support minor sports, like softbal, because otherwise they'd earmark it for football or basketball.

I can't wait to see the designs, hopefully they dress it up a bit (instead of just bleachers). It would be nice to see some chairback seating behind the plate.

It would be great to see them do a nice job on the volleyball venue as well, I think we would have a chance to be a national contender with a nice facility.

There are seat backs behind home plate today.SB certainly needs at upgrade (for example to the player facilities and the bleachers behind the outfield (they should be moved to the baselines).But given the cost, I'm questioning the need for 5000 seats and lights necessary to host NCAA regionals. Seems to me that if we didn't try to do that (requiring the entire field from being flipped) the cost would be half.

Regarding VB. I only went to my first Beach VB matches this year, and I can say that they desperately need an upgrade. But my guess is the cost of what they are talking about is only a fifth or less of the $30M.

I can't wait to see the designs, hopefully they dress it up a bit (instead of just bleachers). It would be nice to see some chairback seating behind the plate.

It would be great to see them do a nice job on the volleyball venue as well, I think we would have a chance to be a national contender with a nice facility.

There are seat backs behind home plate today.SB certainly needs at upgrade (for example to the player facilities and the bleachers behind the outfield (they should be moved to the baselines).But given the cost, I'm questioning the need for 5000 seats and lights necessary to host NCAA regionals. Seems to me that if we didn't try to do that (requiring the entire field from being flipped) the cost would be half.

Regarding VB. I only went to my first Beach VB matches this year, and I can say that they desperately need an upgrade. But my guess is the cost of what they are talking about is only a fifth or less of the $30M.

I don't get that this is such "great" news. Maybe for the handful of people who actually want to go to watch these two sports.

I thought the Chancellor & new AD were telling us that we had hard choices ahead to get an ongoing balanced budget for collegiate sports.

$30M for two sports have have no chance to even come close to partially paying for themselves sounds crazy to me. Where in the world is this money going to come from?

Did you read the letter? She stated specifically where the money is coming from.

"Undesignated Bequests" isn't exactly a very descriptive or specific statement for where the money is coming from. The question I have is this coming from somewhere in athletics, or from other funds the chancellor has control over (or both). Birgeneau tapped some kind of 'non state supported' fund to cover athletic deficits, but that still means other projects that might benefit the campus could not be supported. I'd presume it's the same now with the athletics deficit and now extra facilities.

My worry is that if it's coming from 'undesignated' funds on athletics side, sports like MBB will suffer and we won't have the budget to change improve what needs improving. Then, ticket sales fall of a cliff and the deficit is even bigger.

And I believe the AD has a much expanded 'undesignated' fund this year in the "Cal Athletics Fund" as required seat donations for CMS and Haas are now (as of 2018) required to go to the CAF General Fund and cannot be designated to the sports of a donor's choice, even if that's the sport the seats are for.

I wonder if there will be TV facilities built into these venues for the Pac 12 network. 30 million seems awfully expensive for a remodel of the softball venue and the new Volleyball courts. Of course, San Volleyball and Softball seem to be staples of the Pac 12 network....

Press box is a requirement of the NCAA to host postseason softball games. I'm sure the facilities will have P12 Network ready facilities. Problem is the p12 Network outside of football produces very little revenue compared to the production costs. That said, I don't think the press box cost is what's driving the large expense. It would be a couple of rooms...

"Undesignated Bequests" isn't exactly a very descriptive or specific statement for where the money is coming from. The question I have is this coming from somewhere in athletics, or from other funds the chancellor has control over (or both). Birgeneau tapped some kind of 'non state supported' fund to cover athletic deficits, but that still means other projects that might benefit the campus could not be supported. I'd presume it's the same now with the athletics deficit and now extra facilities.

When I make my annual donation to get better season tickets for football and basketball, it goes to this: Drive2018 Unrestricted, Program Annual Giving. I think that qualifies as undesignated.